Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > Smith & Wesson Revolvers > S&W Antiques
o

Notices

S&W Antiques S&W Lever Action Pistols, Tip-Up Revolvers, ALL Top-Break Revolvers, and ALL Single Shots


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-09-2021, 09:10 PM
BMur BMur is offline
Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 2,845
Likes: 1,779
Liked 4,509 Times in 1,657 Posts
Default The "Surplus Schofields"

I'm back on my research for the Schofields and Wells Fargos.

In my antique ammo collection I have several dug ups from an Old Army Fort in New Mexico. I was going through them today and Noticed that the Frankford Arsenal date stamp on the latest 45 Schofield is March of 1885?

Also, both the Schofields and the Single Action Army "Benet" primed cases supported "Hollow Base" bullets? These are authentic period bullets found at the same location as the shells. I've never seen or heard of hollow based bullets for these 45 Cal revolvers but there they are!

My primary question is since the Schofield Revolvers went to Surplus in 1880....Obviously there were quite a few still in service in 1885 since The Frankford Arsenal was still cranking out ammo. So that's at least 5 years after they went to surplus? That seems to me to be quite a long time. I'm wondering what took so long to remove them from service?

If we look at other Military contracts of that era? Replacing revolvers never took that long! Seems like the Schofield revolver wasn't removed from service as fast as is documented?


Murph

Last edited by BMur; 01-09-2021 at 10:31 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-09-2021, 10:41 PM
BMur BMur is offline
Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 2,845
Likes: 1,779
Liked 4,509 Times in 1,657 Posts
Default Springfield Records

I'm cross referencing the Military Records available that show in 1880 there were 3,000 Single Action 45 Cal Colt revolvers issued to the Cavalry. This co-insides with the same year the Schofields were apparently sent to surplus. See Photo of authentic recorded numbers.

Following the subsequent years starting in 1880 with the Schofields going to Surplus? You can see that by 1885 an additional 11,000 45 Colts were already issued. So, the Schofields should have been gone by then but obviously they weren't for some reason.

Also, by 1885 over 31,000 total Colt 45's were issued to the Cavalry. That's a lot!

Murph
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 1DD661F2-1607-4FA4-A31C-7A74CA8AFD03.jpg (51.9 KB, 113 views)

Last edited by BMur; 01-09-2021 at 10:45 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Like Post:
  #3  
Old 01-10-2021, 07:21 AM
StrawHat's Avatar
StrawHat StrawHat is offline
SWCA Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Northeast Ohio
Posts: 5,988
Likes: 9,191
Liked 13,457 Times in 3,971 Posts
Default

The Army had been using the 45 S&W ammunition in both revolvers. No reason not to continue that practice even though one of the revolvers has been retired.

Kevin
__________________
Unshared knowledge is wasted.
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Like Post:
  #4  
Old 01-10-2021, 10:59 AM
LittleCooner's Avatar
LittleCooner LittleCooner is offline
Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Northeast Alabama
Posts: 1,267
Likes: 2,777
Liked 1,917 Times in 705 Posts
Default

The .45 Schofield cartridge was shorter than the .45 Colt. It could be used in both the Schofield and the Colt 45 Peacemaker, but the .45 Colt was too long to use in the Schofield. As a result, by the late 1880s the army finally standardized on a .45 cartridge designed to fire in both revolvers, the M1887 Military Ball Cartridge. The M1887 was made at Frankford Arsenal, and was issued only to the military. It had the shorter case of the Schofield and the reduced rim of the Colt round; as it was short enough to fit the Schofield, and its rim was not needed for the rod-ejector Single Action Army, the M1887 would fire and eject from both revolvers.

Interesting question on a subject I have no knowledge, so I found the above on Wikipedia. It appears from the above statement that the government continued to issue and manufacture 45 S&W that may also contain a 86 & 87 date stamp? A most interesting time of our history of firearms, everyone was trying to invent a better mouse trap and rise to the top of the heap. Am I correct that the single action Colt only became the sidearm because of the more powerful round when it appears the break action S&W would have been the superior sidearm as Schofield intended on the ability to quick reload by horse mounted men.
Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Like Post:
  #5  
Old 01-10-2021, 11:48 AM
Wiregrassguy's Avatar
Wiregrassguy Wiregrassguy is offline
SWCA Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: AL Wiregrass
Posts: 7,201
Likes: 34,555
Liked 10,739 Times in 3,659 Posts
Default

Quote:
Am I correct that the single action Colt only became the sidearm because of the more powerful round when it appears the break action S&W would have been the superior sidearm as Schofield intended on the ability to quick reload by horse mounted men.
From the SCSW, 4th Ed.


Quote:
The Schofield originated with the efforts of Col. George Schofield to improve the American Model Three for military usage. As noted earlier, the American was the first cartridge revolver adopted by the military in 1870, with a purchase of 1000. However, in 1874 the Army purchased 8000 Colt Single Action Army models, noting a preference for their strength and simplicity. In Army tests of this era, S&W Americans and Russians passed the firing and functioning criteria, but were criticized for their complexity and number of parts. The greater ease and speed of reloading was noted, but was not given much credence as a tactical advantage. The Russian model was criticized for the awkwardness of its grip, hammer, and trigger-guard spur.

(Page 111).
The 1st model Schofield was issued in 1875, a year after the Army adopted the Colt SAA. If S&W had chambered it for .45 Colt, it likely would have replaced the SAA as the handgun of choice. But, gun manufacturers back then were cutthroat not to give any recognition to a competitor. So, S&W made a short version of the .45 Colt and it proved problematic when all that was available was .45 Colt which rendered the Schofields inoperable.
__________________
Guy
SWHF #474 SWCA LM#2629

Last edited by Wiregrassguy; 01-10-2021 at 12:10 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Like Post:
  #6  
Old 01-10-2021, 12:03 PM
Kurusu's Avatar
Kurusu Kurusu is offline
Absent Comrade
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Portugal
Posts: 5,538
Likes: 39,612
Liked 18,061 Times in 4,567 Posts
Default

The load reduction on the "government" .45 cartridge started because the full 40 grs load proved to be too much for mounted Cavalry "greenhorns" that would easily fall from their horses when firing. Modern smokeless .45 Colt is loaded closer to the equivalent of around 23/26 grs blackpowder than to the "real deal" 40 grs..

It only made sense, for logistic reasons, to standardise the round to Schofield lenght.

The model 3 Smith & Wesson could easily handle the more powerfull .45 Colt cartridge, but the frame wasn't long enough, and apparently folks at Smith & Wesson thought it wasn't worth it to changd the frame. They later did it for the Japanese Navy contract in .44-40(same power and lenght as.45 Colt).
__________________
Expect the unexpected
Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Like Post:
  #7  
Old 01-10-2021, 01:48 PM
BMur BMur is offline
Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 2,845
Likes: 1,779
Liked 4,509 Times in 1,657 Posts
Default 1887 Frankford 45 Ball Cartridge

The 1887 "Ball" cartridge was actually manufactured to be chambered in "BOTH" revolvers by the Frankford Arsenal. That being said, obviously both revolvers were still in service. In fact the same article claims that the Schofields were in service until 1892. I don't know where they came to that conclusion but the records that I posted support this position. A gradual removal from service that began in 1880 and took 12 years to complete. That is amazing to me. 12 years to remove a gun from service? Sure doesn't make sense to me. The entire removal of the Schofield honestly doesn't make sense to me. Especially since they actually manufactured a viable round in 1887 that fits and functions in "BOTH" guns!

I'm going to look closely at the dug up bullets that I have and look at the rifling signature to see if any have the Smith and Wesson pattern rifling.

I'm not buying into the concept that the Frankford Arsenal kept making the 45 Schofield round after the gun was removed from service. I think the 1887 Ball round is proof positive that the Schofield was still out there for several more years in fact!

Murph

Last edited by BMur; 01-10-2021 at 01:54 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Like Post:
  #8  
Old 01-10-2021, 01:53 PM
LoboGunLeather's Avatar
LoboGunLeather LoboGunLeather is offline
US Veteran
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Colorado
Posts: 7,518
Likes: 19,273
Liked 32,340 Times in 5,474 Posts
Default

In addition to the use of a standardized .45 caliber cartridge for both the Colt and S&W revolvers there is the history of issuing handguns. Revolvers were routinely issued to enlisted soldiers, particularly cavalry troops, but officers were expected to furnish their own sidearms. Many officers of the Indian Wars period served for decades and may well have retained the S&W handguns long after those in Army inventory were withdrawn as surplus.

During the same period the Army also contracted with civilian scouts and utilized Indian auxiliaries (mostly in the scouting and tracking capacity), some of whom may have acquired revolvers over the years, maybe even purchasing those S&W revolvers when declared as surplus. There was probably a good reason to maintain supplies of ammunition suitable for those uses.

Military officers were not usually issued handguns until about World War II, and most of the available and popular handguns were in regular use for many years.
Reply With Quote
The Following 7 Users Like Post:
  #9  
Old 01-10-2021, 01:54 PM
Kurusu's Avatar
Kurusu Kurusu is offline
Absent Comrade
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Portugal
Posts: 5,538
Likes: 39,612
Liked 18,061 Times in 4,567 Posts
Default

Actually the Schofield made much more sense as a "Cavalry pistol" than the SAA.
__________________
Expect the unexpected
Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Like Post:
  #10  
Old 01-10-2021, 02:08 PM
BMur BMur is offline
Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 2,845
Likes: 1,779
Liked 4,509 Times in 1,657 Posts
Default Cross Referencing the Wells Fargos

When we plug in the Wells Fargos? The pattern of a "Gradual" elimination of the Schofields from Military Service fits as well.

Multiple type Wells Fargo Property Stamps also suggests multiple bulk contracts between Major Distributors and Express Companies that took place over about a 8-10 year period beginning in 1880. Likely beginning in 1880 with about 3,000 Schofields going to Surplus. With each year more and more being sold off to surplus. I had no idea it was this long a period though. It does fit the pattern of Gradual distribution. It also fits like a glove the purchasing of Express guns "gradually" by the Express Agents. Their interest in the Schofields would be a NO Brainer.

Very interesting history to the Schofields and what happened to them once the Major Distributor got their hands on them.


Murph

Last edited by BMur; 01-10-2021 at 02:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #11  
Old 01-10-2021, 03:32 PM
BMur BMur is offline
Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 2,845
Likes: 1,779
Liked 4,509 Times in 1,657 Posts
Default Historical Research

Ok,
I found the source of the 1892/3 Schofield. See photo. Apparently the Army already had the Stock on hand but gradually issued the guns all the way up to 1893 in very low numbers towards the end.

So, what they had on hand that went to surplus likely was never even issued/used! Amazing. It's also amazing if you look at the numbers you can see the potential in sales to the Military after the Schofield was discontinued in about 1879. The Army was still wanting more 45's. So they just purchased Colts!

Also, amazing to me is how long it took for the Frankford Arsenal to come up with a "dual purpose" 45 Round in 1887 for both the Colt and Smith & Wesson? 12 years? Talk about boneheads!

Simple question: How do we resolve this problem with the 45 cartridge not fitting in both our revolvers? HMMMM....I know, lets make one that fits in both guns! 12 years later!!

Take a good look at the list I posted and you will see just how many Revolvers that could have been Schofields were issued to the Military post 1878 if they had just kept making the gun and simply made a cartridge that would fit and function in both Revolvers. Significant mistake in my opinion.

So, again, looking at these numbers also supports that approximately 3,000 Schofields went to Surplus in 1880 and that those guns were never even issued. Sat in the Arsenal for 2 years and then sold as Surplus....Wow! That's Amazing!!


Murph
Attached Images
File Type: jpg A2587A19-5FB1-4014-B54D-88FD1809CF4D.jpg (73.6 KB, 72 views)

Last edited by BMur; 01-10-2021 at 03:38 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Like Post:
  #12  
Old 01-10-2021, 03:43 PM
Kurusu's Avatar
Kurusu Kurusu is offline
Absent Comrade
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Portugal
Posts: 5,538
Likes: 39,612
Liked 18,061 Times in 4,567 Posts
Default

Once again and ever. Tax Dollars at work.
__________________
Expect the unexpected
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #13  
Old 01-10-2021, 08:09 PM
BMur BMur is offline
Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 2,845
Likes: 1,779
Liked 4,509 Times in 1,657 Posts
Default Removal from Arsenals

I found multiple sources that claim "ALL" the Schofields were removed from "Regular" Army Arsenals by 1880.

However, if we reference the issuance of Schofields? by this time (1880) there were already approximately 4,256 Schofields of the 8,285 delivered to the Army that were already issued and in the field. Subsequent years also list additional firearms issued. Not in great numbers but they were issued so I'm not taking that source of information as point of fact or absolute. More of a general statement. It does still support that between 3,000-4,000 went to Surplus very quickly and that those were in mint, unused condition.


Murph
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #14  
Old 01-10-2021, 09:49 PM
opoefc opoefc is offline
Absent Comrade
US Veteran
SWCA Founding Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: San Diego, CA. USA
Posts: 10,536
Likes: 3,529
Liked 6,883 Times in 2,796 Posts
Default

Murph, What is the source of the lists you posted ? The totals do not seam to match ordnance records or archival data. Are those numbers just military or do they include the civilian Schofields gifted or sold to individuals and distributors? Thanks, Ed
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-10-2021, 10:12 PM
BMur BMur is offline
Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 2,845
Likes: 1,779
Liked 4,509 Times in 1,657 Posts
Default Source of research numbers?

Hi Ed,
My first listing is from the Keith Cochran book: Colt Peacemaker Encyclopedia page 89. Listing of Cavalry Model Annual Procurement from 1873 to 1893. None of these listings include Civilian sales etc.

Second listing is a compiling and comparison that was edited in the book Handguns of the World by Edward C. Ezell on page 59. Also a reference to John E. Parsons "The Peacemaker and its Rivals circa 1950 and slightly different figures but close enough from Ron Graham's "Study of the Colt Single Action Army Revolver Page 455. All references basically concur with the posted numbers.

The best reference in my opinion is the Handguns of the World which is an extensive study of Military issued firearms. I still don't know where they obtained the information about the Army Arsenals removing "ALL" of the Schofields by 1880. There were many, many Schofields already issued by 1880 so that's an interesting perspective.

I believe it was a focus on Surplus guns that were stored in the Arsenals. NOT "ALL" the Schofields! Surplus to me means beyond what is needed from a Military perspective at any given time. They obviously had a large Surplus of Single Action Army revolvers as well. So, I'm thinking that perhaps 1,000 were kept for re-supply in lieu of "eventually" and "gradually" removing them from service which is exactly what happened from the information that I'm finding. I'm not challenging anyone here just evaluating what I'm reading and documenting. The concept of "ALL" the Scofields going to surplus in 1880 I believe is not true.
In fact less than half went to Surplus.

What's also great about the Handguns of the World reference is that the author included Military letters from Ordnance officers and an important letter from Cavalry officers
from the Seventh in late 1877 who were involved in a number of very small engagements with Indians. They felt that the rapid reloading feature of the Schofield wasn't as important a feature...Obviously they were not at the Little Big Horn?

There is a HUGE piece to the puzzle that we are missing here and I'm digging for it. I just have a real problem with the Army selling off 3,000 + "BRAND NEW 45 caliber GUNS" stored at Arsenals. Never even used....WHY???



Murph

Last edited by BMur; 01-10-2021 at 11:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Like Post:
  #16  
Old 01-10-2021, 11:14 PM
BMur BMur is offline
Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 2,845
Likes: 1,779
Liked 4,509 Times in 1,657 Posts
Default Elimination of the Schofields

I'm really starting to believe the sole reason that the Army was slowly removing the Schofields from service is mainly due to the Decision from Smith & Wesson to discontinue the model in 1879.

Having Surplus in an Armory of a gun that is no longer being manufactured is not smart. The clock starts ticking regarding the firearm being serviceable and automatically puts the Military in a position to gradually Phase out that model. That's basically what happened. I honestly don't believe that the Army did not want the Schofield. They DID NOT sell off ALL the Schofields in 1880....They Phased them out gradually. Which was unfortunate for Smith & Wesson in my opinion. Military contracts are kinda huge.

This is also supported by the Frankford Arsenal introducing the 1887 45cal cartridge that chambered in both guns. Obviously they were still tending to the Schofield Revolvers at that later time still in service. That doesn't sound like a gun that the Army did not want in service.

I'll go one step further, lightly as I can. I would imagine that the Army wasn't too thrilled with having to phase out a brand new gun and actually sell off new pistols in Storage to Surplus. Probably not too happy about a new gun being discontinued. They were obviously not too happy with Col. Schofield as well. Two years later he commits suicide.

I’m a slow learner but I think I see the picture quite clearly now.

So, it wasn't the guns faults that the military phased it out in my researched opinion. The gun was an excellent Cavalry pistol.

Murph

Last edited by BMur; 01-11-2021 at 12:25 AM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Like Post:
  #17  
Old 01-11-2021, 02:00 AM
opoefc opoefc is offline
Absent Comrade
US Veteran
SWCA Founding Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: San Diego, CA. USA
Posts: 10,536
Likes: 3,529
Liked 6,883 Times in 2,796 Posts
Default

Murph, Thanks for your explanation of where the list you posted got it's start. I'm familiar with the authors and sources you cite. Cochran, (who was a personal fried of mine and we cooperated on much of his Colt info.) and Ezell are writer/editors, not primarily original source researchers and their info was obtained from what was already in print from other sources I beleive, and to my knowledge they did not personally vet the info. they printed. Probably the best qualified author was Parsons as he did extensive research and had access to some factory archives now gone missing. Parson's notes have disappeared however, but the research has been carried on by others using more recently uncovered archival info. that disproves some commonly accepted and long published Schofield info. including Parsons. Especially quanity shipped and where shipped and serial number ranges of 1st models vs. 2nd models, as well as serial numbers of 1st model civilian guns. - Now having said all that, missing from the above postings is the explanation regarding Army shipment of Schofields to State Guard and Militia units. These are recorded in the military archives and regulations in place at the time required the Army to supply those units with ordnance materials and they became a handy outlet for surplus Schofields. Many of these units promptly turned around and sold the Schofields received from the Army to surplus dealers who then sold to buyers like Wells Fargo. Many sources say S&W made 3035 1st models. Factory records cannot verify this. Springfield Arsenal records of Schofields received from S&W do not verify this. There are several known 2nd model Schofields with serial numbers between 3001 and 3035. If the factory did make 3035 1st models then there has to be duplicate serial numbers known. A data base of Schofields kept for 40 yrs has never reported a duplicate number. Personally I beleive the factory did make 3035 1st models but 35 of them had their own serial number range, probably 1 to 35, as that is the only explanation of why there are 1st model civilian Schofields known, and my current mission, with the help of others, is to prove that theory. One of the current endeavors of Schofield scholars is to identify these 1st model non-military civilian made and sold / gifted revolvers. ( Two are known, so far, Ser.#6 & 13 ) Parsons apparently had access to the Factory Day Book which listed names of some Army officers receiving Schofields, but no serial numbers were shown. Factory 1st model shipping records are too fragile for Dr. Roy Jinks to satisfactorily read and he uses the invoice date the factory billed the Army as the shipping date for factory letters. Also, the US stamp on a Schofield is not indicative of a military shipped gun as that stamp is applied early in the manufacturing process and those stamped parts could be used for both civilian and miltary guns. (Nos 6 & 13 are US stamped, but are civilian guns. ) If any Forum member has a Schofield, ser. #s 1 to 35 and it's not a Wells Fargo gun, pls PM me. You may have a very rare 1st model civilian, even if it has a US stamp. Ed

Last edited by opoefc; 01-12-2021 at 07:28 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Like Post:
  #18  
Old 01-11-2021, 03:05 AM
BMur BMur is offline
Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 2,845
Likes: 1,779
Liked 4,509 Times in 1,657 Posts
Default Official documents

Thanks very kindly Ed,
I really appreciate your input and knowledge on the Schofields. If I find anything regarding the Civilian examples I will share that information. It's really a shame when documents disappear. I don't understand that kind of mentality. Nothing of this earth we can take with us. Those historical documents belong to everyone.
I thought you might like these photo's from my 1903 Bannermans Catalog where he was actually still trying to sell the last 100 remaining Schofields among the mountains of his military memorabilia with their original Military holsters no less. For a whopping $7. Get them while they last!

Murph
Attached Images
File Type: jpg E51E95F0-FCB7-45AB-9E8F-1BBE99203615.jpg (43.1 KB, 87 views)
File Type: jpg AFE5DF22-05D1-4F85-B63E-9EABDFC2F84D.jpg (60.1 KB, 104 views)

Last edited by BMur; 01-11-2021 at 03:07 AM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Like Post:
  #19  
Old 01-11-2021, 06:31 AM
walnutred walnutred is offline
US Veteran
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,450
Likes: 785
Liked 3,030 Times in 1,002 Posts
Default

I wonder how many of the "surplus" Schofields continued service with State Militias (pre National Guard)? State Militias being federalized for WW1 and reporting with Trapdoor Springfields is largely what prompted the standardization of the National Guard. In the late 1980s my American Legion Post switched from Krags to M1 Garands for our salute rifles because the Feds had finally run out of 30-40 Krag blanks. Items can stwy in government warehouses for quite a while it seems.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Like Post:
  #20  
Old 01-12-2021, 03:33 PM
BMur BMur is offline
Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 2,845
Likes: 1,779
Liked 4,509 Times in 1,657 Posts
Default Knee Jerk

The only conclusion I can come up with is a Government Knee Jerk reaction to the discontinuance of the Schofield revolver in 1879 regarding the Surplus Sales of the Armory stored Schofield revolvers.
I suspect the Army regretted that decision some years later.

Cross referencing the U.S. Navy at that same time frame? They were cutting costs big time. Forced to Convert Civil War ERA revolvers to cartridge instead of purchasing new guns. Smith & Wesson 38's were actually being considered at that same time to replace outdated Navy Colts. I wonder if this decision to terminate the Schofields in 1879 had a negative impact on that contract and future contracts as well?

The Militia guns would be a very interesting subject I'm sure but no idea where you could locate records for those weapons.


Murph

Last edited by BMur; 01-12-2021 at 03:40 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 01-12-2021, 06:58 PM
opoefc opoefc is offline
Absent Comrade
US Veteran
SWCA Founding Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: San Diego, CA. USA
Posts: 10,536
Likes: 3,529
Liked 6,883 Times in 2,796 Posts
Default

Dr. Roy Jinks has a foot rest for his desk ( his desk being D.B. Wesson's original desk salvaged by Roy from the orig. factory bldg when it was demolished ) that I recall is a crate of 12 Schofield revolvers , brand new in their original grease, obtained yrs ago from Bannerman, the crate is wood and was a Bannerman creation, as the original S&W military Schofields were shipped in a wood crate with a metal lining. Some yrs ago I had a nice Springfield 45-70 Trapdoor in my collection and on a whim I had it researched by the the Springfield Research Service and discovered it's last military service was when had been issued to the US Navy in WW2 ( That's WW2 not WW1 ! ) . Having been a Federalized National Guardsman my self ( 40th Inf. Divison ) I know first hand the quality of ordnance we were supplied with for the Korean War. ( No, it wasn't a Trapdoor but I would not have turned down a Schofield ! ) I can reveal now that Midnight Supply works, as it got us badly needed BARs from the 1st Marine Div ! Ed

Last edited by opoefc; 01-12-2021 at 07:12 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Like Post:
  #22  
Old 01-12-2021, 10:07 PM
BMur BMur is offline
Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 2,845
Likes: 1,779
Liked 4,509 Times in 1,657 Posts
Default Great Story!

Thanks for sharing Ed,

We had the M-14 when I was shipboard. I guess I'm showing my age now.

I have to share this information that I just found in old U.S. Navy Records....I had no idea the Navy had Remington Conversions in 38 caliber shipboard.

Some of the Navy Captains insisted on Remingtons over Colts. I have heard about the cap and ball Remington full frame being much stronger than the Colts but never researched that aspect. Anyway, several U.S. Navy Captains convinced Ordnance Department to research having some of the Remingtons Converted to .38 Centerfire instead of being issued the converted Colts.

The approval was given since Remington was willing to charge the same amount as Colt was to perform the conversion to .38cf. I guess the problem with the Remington conversions was the quality of the conversion according to several U.S. Navy Captains was "Sub-Par" and caused the cylinder to jam against the recoil shield after several rounds being fired....This actually went on from 1876 until 1885 when they were apparently and finally removed from service. Approximately 1000 of them..

Here's the catch. Several Navy vessels received Army caliber 45 Revolvers to "temporarily" replace the Remington Conversions. This was several years before the 1889 Navy 38 cal revolver was issued.
However, the assigned records do not exist that identify the number of revolvers or brand. It is very possible that the U.S. Navy was issued a few hundred 45 Schofields in the early to mid 1880's. Those low and odd numbers seen on the old records of issuance support the possibility that they were sent overseas to supply U. S. Navy ships. They would have had U. S. Army inspector marks so without records of issuance there is no way to prove it. I wonder if old Deck logs are available? Even deck logs would not have the make of gun. Only the caliber and rounds issued normally. A U.S.N. Schofield? I think I would have appreciated a Schofield on deck watch as well. I have to admit, I felt pretty comfortable with a 1911 though.

Murph

Last edited by BMur; 01-12-2021 at 10:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 01-14-2021, 04:02 PM
applefish applefish is offline
Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 34
Likes: 10
Liked 30 Times in 14 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiregrassguy View Post
So, S&W made a short version of the .45 Colt and it proved problematic when all that was available was .45 Colt which rendered the Schofields inoperable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleCooner View Post
The .45 Schofield cartridge was shorter than the .45 Colt. It could be used in both the Schofield and the Colt 45 Peacemaker, but the .45 Colt was too long to use in the Schofield.

I've heard the government stuck with the Colt because they had a large stockpile/contract for .45 Colt ammo, and it was easier on the supply chain (and less costly) to keep the gun that could use the .45 colt ammo rather than switching over.

I think a lot of times government arsenal decisions are driven more by economic factors rather than ballistics or functioning of a gun (assuming the guns meet a minimum standard). It's the same reason the Russian government switched from the S&W .44 Russian revolvers (which they had tooled up to make the copies of at Tula), to the underpowered 7.62 Nagant revolver.

When the russians adopted the 7.62 mosin nagant rifle, they tooled up for producing barrels in 7.62. Since manufacturing wasn't perfect back then, occasionally they would end up with barrels that weren't perfect, but there were shorter sections you could cut off, and then turn down to use as revolver barrels. And then to squeeze the most power they could out of a whimpy 7.62 revolver cartridge, they asked Nagant to develop the gas-seal system.

I think people underestimate economic factors as a driving decision for government arsenal decisions. The most recent example we've seen of this is the XM17 trials, with the government picking the Sig 320 over the Glock because the Sig contract was cheaper.

Last edited by applefish; 01-14-2021 at 07:42 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 01-20-2021, 11:11 AM
9245 9245 is online now
Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: Michigan
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Liked 66 Times in 34 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BMur View Post
I'm back on my research for the Schofields and Wells Fargos.

In my antique ammo collection I have several dug ups from an Old Army Fort in New Mexico. I was going through them today and Noticed that the Frankford Arsenal date stamp on the latest 45 Schofield is March of 1885?

Also, both the Schofields and the Single Action Army "Benet" primed cases supported "Hollow Base" bullets? These are authentic period bullets found at the same location as the shells. I've never seen or heard of hollow based bullets for these 45 Cal revolvers but there they are!

My primary question is since the Schofield Revolvers went to Surplus in 1880....Obviously there were quite a few still in service in 1885 since The Frankford Arsenal was still cranking out ammo. So that's at least 5 years after they went to surplus? That seems to me to be quite a long time. I'm wondering what took so long to remove them from service?

If we look at other Military contracts of that era? Replacing revolvers never took that long! Seems like the Schofield revolver wasn't removed from service as fast as is documented?


Murph
The military is a bureaucracy, it was likely that they were “supposed” to be surplussed in 1880 but in reality were probably phased out over time. Fun fact, in Gulf War 1 tank crews still had M3 Grease Guns from World War 2, the 1911 and M16A1 also remained in service long after they were officially replaced.

Another possibility is that the supply depots never got the message as both the Colt Single Action Army and the Schofield could chamber .45 Schofield so they may just have continued to order Schofield ammo even after the Schofields were surplussed, just because they were not told to stop.

It’s also possible that the ammunition was contamination of the site and was not actually military issue.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 02-05-2021, 11:17 AM
Wrangler Rich's Avatar
Wrangler Rich Wrangler Rich is offline
US Veteran
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Rochelle, Illinois
Posts: 782
Likes: 927
Liked 1,465 Times in 509 Posts
Default

When did Colt start developing an automatic pistol? I think the answer to this question could shed some light on why the Colt 45 and the Smith & Wesson Schofield were being eliminated from Military stock.

WW I was on the horizon, and we know not many Single actions were issued then.

WR
__________________
God, Country, Family
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 02-05-2021, 12:07 PM
lestert357's Avatar
lestert357 lestert357 is offline
US Veteran
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,734
Likes: 983
Liked 6,244 Times in 3,365 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BMur View Post
Also, amazing to me is how long it took for the Frankford Arsenal to come up with a "dual purpose" 45 Round in 1887 for both the Colt and Smith & Wesson? 12 years? Talk about boneheads!

Simple question: How do we resolve this problem with the 45 cartridge not fitting in both our revolvers? HMMMM....I know, lets make one that fits in both guns! 12 years later!!
Murph
This is a fascinating thread, thanks for posting.

One point I am apparently not understanding; I thought the Frankford Arsenal Revolver Ball Cartridges, Caliber .45 manufactured in the late 1870’s as pictured below could be used in both the Schofield and SAA.
__________________
Terry Lester
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #27  
Old 02-05-2021, 12:22 PM
lestert357's Avatar
lestert357 lestert357 is offline
US Veteran
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,734
Likes: 983
Liked 6,244 Times in 3,365 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by opoefc View Post
Dr. Roy Jinks has a foot rest for his desk that I recall is a crate of 12 Schofield revolvers , brand new in their original grease
Ed, I sure would like to see a picture of that!
__________________
Terry Lester
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #28  
Old 02-05-2021, 08:26 PM
BMur BMur is offline
Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 2,845
Likes: 1,779
Liked 4,509 Times in 1,657 Posts
Default 45 cartridge

There is a lot of history to the early 45 Government cartridge in pistol configuration. An ongoing argument is the 45 Long/ 45 Short Colt?

The earliest documented listing from the government testing the various 45's confirms the existence of different case lengths for the 45 Colt. This was due to different loads being available in the early 45 Colt. If you perform in depth research? You will find the exact same issue with many pistol calibers. One example is the .41 Rimfire. My studies found about 12 different loads and 8 different case lengths. They were all listed as a .41 Rimfire at that time.

If using Black powder? You must reduce or lengthen the case to match the powder load. Simple as that. The cornmeal concept wasn't born yet.

The specific earliest loads for the 45 Colt were a 250 grain round nose lead bullet with 40 Grains of FFG compressed. Which was the longer overall case length. Another proven load was the 230 grain round nose bullet with 28 grains of FFG compressed. This required a different case length. Both were 45 Colts. The shorter case length actually near matched the original 45 Schofield load. Which only adds to historical confusion and arguments abound.

The real problem with the Schofield/Colt compatibility was the case head diameter. The earliest seen in my photo first one on the left? Had an inside primer and a very mild rim. This continued for many years.

This was a major problem for the Schofield. Even the shorter case with 230 grain bullet would not eject from the revolver and induced a jam. That was the "REAL" problem.

So, following further to the right you see the transition of cartridges until the last two? Notice specifically the rim diameter on the Model of 1887 Government Frankford Arsenal 45 Colt case?

That is the real transition to conform to multi-use in both the 45 Colt and the 45 Schofield......Case length was not the real issue. It's the head or rim diameter that was the real issue. Without the wider rim? The ejector would jam in the Schofield revolver.


Murph
Attached Images
File Type: jpg E2E6D2E6-34C3-430B-8028-C88AF48C468E.jpg (26.9 KB, 37 views)

Last edited by BMur; 02-05-2021 at 08:35 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #29  
Old 02-05-2021, 11:56 PM
BMur BMur is offline
Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 2,845
Likes: 1,779
Liked 4,509 Times in 1,657 Posts
Default 45 Colt/ 45 Schofield

Actually,
This photo tells it much better. Notice these early cartridges. They are all post 1883 head stamped but most of them are clearly black powder cartridges that are pre-1900 except for the Rem-UMC's.

What you will notice right away is 45 S&W's next to 45 Colt's that look exactly the same. Both in Case length and basic bullet design.

This is the source of all the arguments regarding the origin of the lighter Colt round. I have some of these early Colt cartridges in my collection that date to pre-1883 and are not head stamped. They are not Schofield rounds based on the undersized rim diameter. I have tried them in my Schofield's and they most definitely Do not eject.

Many collectors in fact miss-identify early light Colt loads as Schofield rounds. They will argue with you until they can't breath....but the simple test is "Well, try them in a Schofield and see if they eject"...When they don't eject? The answer stares them in the face. The early Schofield rounds are obvious. They have large rims!

So the exact origin of the lighter Colt loads is subject to interpretation. Most of us who have loaded the 45 Colt with full loads of black powder and the 250 grain bullet have an idea about why they would introduce a lighter load. It really is too powerful a load to control on horseback in my opinion.

Also, in my opinion they would have introduced a lighter load right away to solve this problem. It's a great historical subject that has brought many a technical argument. It's just amazing to me that they would take so long to solve the issue with the Schofield ejection problem by simply making the head diameter larger but early Colt light loads prove that they did not correct this problem until much later. Why did it take so long? Good Question.

In my opinion the Discontinuance of the Schofield model sent a panic wave throughout the U.S. Army having thousands stored in Arsenals and thousands more already issued an in the field throughout the U.S. None of that was a good thing. Someone had to answer for that one. Probably lots of heads rolled on that issue that took some time for the dust to settle.

Murph
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 50FFF5B7-3630-48B4-AA87-43FD75282A42.jpg (49.4 KB, 42 views)

Last edited by BMur; 02-06-2021 at 12:01 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 02-06-2021, 09:34 AM
SPEEDGUNNER's Avatar
SPEEDGUNNER SPEEDGUNNER is offline
Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Between the Brandywines
Posts: 2,669
Likes: 616
Liked 2,909 Times in 1,065 Posts
Default

Fantastic thread! Lots of good information for the collector and the interested. Who on this forum wouldn't give to own a U.S. Marked Schofield?

I too would like to see of Mr. Jinks "footrest"...urban legend or truth?
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 02-06-2021, 10:38 AM
JSR III's Avatar
JSR III JSR III is offline
SWCA Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 9,575
Likes: 3,695
Liked 8,923 Times in 3,544 Posts
Default

Two things come to mind here and I'll admit that I did not have time to read both pages of responses.

1) Today we are used to having things move at lightning speed. An event happens in Europe and it is on our TV screens and computer monitors within minutes. Back in the 1800's things moved a lot slower. If new arms were brought to service an outpost out in the west could not expect a FedEx or Amazon delivery to arrive overnight. I joke but you get my drift.

2) Also when researching facts based on reading books, there is no guarantee that the authors statements are etched in stone. Many times errors are made and then brought forward in future works and so the misinformation rolls forward and is regarded as "fact". Much of the information that we learn about older firearms is based on "observations" and quantities and dates can sometimes be under or over stated.

We collectors always want things tied up in little red bows with exact dates and serial numbers and in the world of manufacturing and distribution, it just doesn't always work that way.

These are merely my thoughts on the subject and your opinions may vary.
__________________
James Redfield
LM #497
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Like Post:
  #32  
Old 02-06-2021, 11:30 AM
Club Gun Fan's Avatar
Club Gun Fan Club Gun Fan is offline
S&W Historian
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 5,942
Likes: 3,380
Liked 11,295 Times in 2,882 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lestert357 View Post
Ed, I sure would like to see a picture of that!
Lester357
You'll have to settle for a picture of my Schofield with a reproduction of Dr. Jinks' Schofield box which was made by another Forum member. It is complete with all the 4 inserts to hold 16 Scofield's. It even has the wax seal on the top and bottom to show if it was opened prior to its destination. By the way, I think there are some copies of the box still available.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Schofield and crate 3.jpg (116.7 KB, 63 views)
__________________
Don Mundell
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Like Post:
  #33  
Old 07-21-2021, 04:44 AM
Giorgio Italy Giorgio Italy is offline
Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: Padova Italy
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Liked 235 Times in 74 Posts
Default

Hello everybody. Of course I have only known this forum recently and sometimes I enjoy reading the old threads. This is really very interesting for me! However, regarding the .45 Government cartridge I have always known (but I believe my sources are the same as you have) that the Chief of Ordnance ordered the Frankford Arsenal to stop production of the "Cartridge for Colt's Revolver" in the summer of 1874 (the contract date for the first 3000 Schofield was in September) and this started the production of the "Revolver Ball Cartridge". Why are you talking here about a version for the Colt and S&W born only in 1887? The 1875 cartridge already had a 28 grs powder charge and a 230 grs bullet. Of course the OAL was 1.42 "and the rim diameter was increased by .02" (0.5mm) to be positively ejected by the Schofield extractor. It seems to me that the first boxes of "Revolver ball Cartridges" have the date of 1875, but without the month as it happened in the previous version. The same date, 1875, of the first supply of the Schofield revolvers. If I'm not mistaken, since then this model of cartridge (since 1882 produced with the external primer and no longer with the internal Benet one) have even been produced until the birth of the mod. 1909 for the double action Colt mod 1909. So even during the war with Spain. And this, I suppose, only for logistical problems since the Schofield had been withdrawn for some time.
Giorgio
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #34  
Old 07-21-2021, 06:54 PM
Kinman's Avatar
Kinman Kinman is offline
Member
The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields" The "Surplus Schofields"  
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Spokantucky
Posts: 4,098
Likes: 10,349
Liked 6,901 Times in 2,335 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Club Gun Fan View Post
Lester357
You'll have to settle for a picture of my Schofield with a reproduction of Dr. Jinks' Schofield box which was made by another Forum member. It is complete with all the 4 inserts to hold 16 Scofield's. It even has the wax seal on the top and bottom to show if it was opened prior to its destination. By the way, I think there are some copies of the box still available.
Thats too cool, like the old man at IMI's bronze cannon footrest. I remember having a conversation with an old "horse soldier" that had been cavalry all his 30 years back to real horse soldier days. I recalled that the cavalry's requirement for a sidearm was that it had to be able to put an injured horse down, which was a problem for Colt when they tried to sell them on the early .38 Colts, the Calvary wasn't happy. He also opined that the S&W Schofield was a superior firearm for a mounted troop as you could actually reload from horseback, the SAA was more difficult. He mentioned that he had heard the biggest fuss about the different ammo in different firearm came to a head when they ran short of ammo for their Schofields in California, when the ammo finally arrived it was .45 Colt, useless to them.
I've seen a skilled rider exchange Remington 1858 cap and ball cylinders while horseback. As was mentioned officer had to buy their own sidearms, well heeled officers often carried two mounted foreward over the cantle, one on each side during the cap and ball days, twelve shots before resorting to the saber.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Dinty Moore """Beef Stew"""" is more like: hamburger soup. the ringo kid The Lounge 131 01-16-2018 07:45 PM
SV Victory "surplus" question BibleronKJV S&W Hand Ejectors: 1896 to 1961 6 08-28-2015 08:33 PM
Anyone have any surplus 3" K frames? rc51kid S&W Revolvers: 1961 to 1980 20 03-21-2013 09:31 AM
Military Surplus CLP "Larg size" George9 Smith & Wesson M&P Pistols 2 03-14-2013 10:19 AM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:11 AM.


Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)